Intelligence Squared Debate

Few American businesses are as polarizing to the nation’s people as Walmart, which many believe is pushing out smaller businesses and dominating the marketplace while paying its workers low wages and relying on cheaply made foreign goods, as opposed to those manufactured on American soil. With the brick-and-mortar retail industry in its entirety now facing diminishing sales as Americans increasingly shop and spend online, however, some believe Walmart provides critical job opportunities to low-skilled workers while encouraging commerce and growth in rural or under-served areas.

There is little that offers more insight into the current divisive state of the nation than the recent presidential election results, and the fact that President Donald Trump was elected to the highest office in the land despite losing the popular vote by nearly three million votes. Now that he is in office, views about whether he should be embraced or rejected by the American public continue to vary broadly. Does his election offer evidence of an extremist culture, and does following his lead only ensure more of the same? Or do Americans have a patriotic duty to rally behind their leader, because doing anything else would only further divide the public, and therefore not benefit anyone?

Pre-Debate Poll Results

Prior to the debate, 28 percent of audience members were in favor of the motion that the American public needs to give President Donald Trump a chance, while 43 percent were against the motion and 29 percent were undecided.

When Donald Trump first stepped into the political arena, many saw his entry as little more than yet another way to raise his public profile profile and get his face in front of more cameras. As time went on, however, and other Republican presidential candidates began to drop out of the presidential race left and right, those who may not have initially considered Trump a serious contender for the highest office in the land were forced to reconsider.

The “Clean Power Plan” was devised by President Barack Obama to help fight the effects of climate change, and it involved having each U.S. state reduce its carbon-dioxide output by 30 percent by the year 2030. The Environmental Protection Agency is the governing body tasked with overseeing the implementation of the Clean Power Plan, but increasing controversy surrounding the measure has led many to take a closer look at its tenets and whether the EPA may, in this case, be overstepping.

To reduce emissions as required by the plan, American businesses must comply with specific EPA regulations. Some believe that doing so will hinder the nation’s stance as a pillar of industry by limiting output and forcing companies to rely on technologies that have not yet been thoroughly tested for safety or efficacy. Others believe that the United States has a duty to lead the rest of the world in terms of working to prevent climate change, and that, rather than prove a hindrance, forced compliance with the Clean Power plan will encourage innovation.